Of course Roger wants faster courts now. At this stage in his career that's the only way he'll win slams. I don't remember Roger having too many complaints with court speeds when he was winning 2-3 slams a year.

At the same time, faster courts would ensure that Rafa never gets close to his grand slam record.

nadal all his career wants less hardcourts tournys and less speed too.

and federer said many times that the courts were everyears more slowers , especially in wimbledon.

and this ultra-slow courts begginning after 2008 or 2009 , in 2008 with australia and 2010 or 2011 with us open , ATP all the years was slow down the courts for help physicall players like nadal and others.

I don`t consider that the slow courts helped federer against big servers , I mean he defeated sampras in a very fast grass , ivanisevic in a fast indoor and roddick in all kind of surfaces , federer not has many problems against big servers.

No doubt slower surfaces has helped him against a big server like roddick, but nadal started challenging him outside clay from 2006 onwards - right in the middle of his prime years

Say if federer lost 2 wimbledons and us opens to roddick/another big server, he would've also gained a similar number of slams from nadal from 2008 onwards. In fact, I think the slower surfaces have benefited nadal against him, more than it has for him against roddick. We've seen federer can play short point serve and volley very well in his performances against sampras in 2001, and then his wimbledon victory in 2003 (when S+V was still a big part of the game) in which he defeated roddick in straight sets at the semi-final.

His serve is probably better than roddick as seen in the 2009 wimbledon final, roddick served out of his skin but still got out-aced. So I have no doubt that he'll still flourish in very quick 90s conditions. Nadal on the other hand, I'm not sure about. His serve is still pretty shit considering he's won 11 grand slams with it, his volleying and general net game is even worse.

No doubt that nadal was more beneficited , especially on grass.......

in 2007 , The wimbledon`s organizers decided change the natural grass for rolls of grass because the natural grass aren`t good because the courts were not capable to recovery fast and they thinking in the olympics game this year , that change of the natural grass to the rolls of grass transform the grass in a more slow surface and with much more high bouncing and just that year was when nadal started to complicated federer on grass.

that rolls of grass destroyed wimbledon and the form of cut the grass too + heavy and big balls kill this tourny in all aspects , the change the grass , they cut the grass different to stop more the shots and use more heavy balls

Have to laugh at Roger fans presenting this as him caring for the game! He's benefited from the slower courts throughout his career - far easier for him to rack up all those Wimbledons and US Opens in an era which didn't favour big servers than in the 90s. It's only now that Djokovic, Murray etc. have a clear advantage over him on those courts and he's a step slower that he has spoken about this issue - he's been on tour 14+ years, is in his 30s - speaking about it isn't showing leadership, it's pure self interest.

Also, apart from minorities of vocal fans on messageboards the vast majority of the public don't seem to have an issue with the court speed. Tennis is far more popular now than in late 90s - the top stars get great coverage, top events sell out etc. I'd be happy to see more variety but the idea that all courts are the same is a nonsense anyway. If they were we'd see the likes of Almagro picking up 250 hardcourt/indoor titles rather than only winning on clay and vice versa for those with terrible clay records. If the hard courts are a little slower it's also true that the clay is a little faster.

So it's great for Federer to talk about the top guys being "protected" but it might have meant more if he'd wanted any change when it would have been adverse to him. No doubt Nadal, Djokovic and Murray will disagree and why wouldn't they - they'll all favour the type of court that helps them.

You're missing the point that many courts have got slower since Federer's prime, which may explain why he didn't make this point then. Had courts been faster, I struggle to think which big servers would have stopped him winning slams. Roddick? Karlovic? Peak Federer's ability to return big serves was uncanny whatever the surface speed.

__________________
"There is no such thing as 'the world'." - Enoch Powell.

Speed up the courts and we will see less Career Slam winners like from 1969-1999. Grass is supposed to be very fast and slick not the current green clay. USO is supposed to be a fast HC not these days' blue clay.

Quote:

Originally Posted by End da Game

too right he is, these grindfest surfaces are a disgrace to the sport, talented attacking players like del potro are losing out to boring pushers like mugray and ferrer

3 players (well djoko will almost certainly win the FO) getting a career slam in recent years is ultimate proof of how much damage homogenized surfaces has done to the creditability of players' achievements these days

aggassi's career slam is worth 10 times more than if it were achieved today

Federer is the only active player that would achieve the Career Slam in ANY ERA. The current homogenization of the slams has made a mockery of the Career Slam.

The YEC is supposed to be played on very fast indoors hc not the blue clay of 2012.

Re: Should Court Speeds be regulated by a governming body and is CPR pointless?

Quote:

Originally Posted by peRfect-Tennis

Players are self interested though. If you ask Nadal if he will want slower everytime. So you can't count opinions like that.

I just said there's a regulation and that tournament organizers can't completely do what they want.

The question of whose interests are taken into account in this regulation is another topic which has already been vastly debated in this forum.

Quote:

Originally Posted by peRfect-Tennis

Not true about the European Indoor tournaments either - Paris Bercy surface uses a different surface to London.

are you sure your info in bold is up-to-date ?
In the articles I read in France in 2012, I read tournament organizers say that they had used the exact same surface and the exact same balls as the WTF this year, because of the ATP and top-players' request and the WTF being played right following week.

Re: Should Court Speeds be regulated by a governming body and is CPR pointless?

Quote:

Originally Posted by duong

I just said there's a regulation and that tournament organizers can't completely do what they want.

The question of whose interests are taken into account in this regulation is another topic which has already been vastly debated in this forum.

are you sure your info in bold is up-to-date ?
In the articles I read in France in 2012, I read tournament organizers say that they had used the exact same surface and the exact same balls as the WTF this year, because of the ATP and top-players' request and the WTF being played right following week.

As far as I'm aware Paris still uses a different surface to London. It looks different visually too in terms of texture but that might be to do with the colours.

Stan proved tonight that no matter the court speed, good shotmaking is still just as an effective strategy to beat top players. The match was based on a coin toss, and it was a great match regardless of whoever won.

__________________

Quote:

Hian about himself

Quote:

No words can describe me. Without me, it would be just aweso.

No shit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTwEeZi

Never held a racquet in my life.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTwEeZi

I've played the game for close to 10 years. This should come as no surprise to many.

Tonight was a great match but the inability to hit through the court at the AO is really getting beyond a joke. I don't mind having the ball sit up a little bit to prolong rallies, but it's getting to the point where it's near impossible to hit a winner from any reasonable position on the court.

Stan had to work some ridiculous angles to prevent Djokovic from getting a racquet on the ball, and Novak wasn't even playing that well.